The race for land

Has fertile land with access to water become the new oil? The world is experiencing a race for land set to rival the 'rush for Africa' by colonial powers in the 19th century.

Resource hungry nations are snapping up huge tracts of agricultural land in poor African and Asian nations in an effort to secure their food supply and provide bio-fuels to meet future energy needs.

With world agricultural markets in turmoil, the strategic value of land for crops has seen governments from the Middle East to Eastern Africa furiously lobby some of the poorest and most unstable countries in the world.

Why is this level of agricultural investment in foreign countries unprecedented?

Significantly, it signals a shift in foreign policy, as large scale land deals are now taking place between governments instead of private investors. Already, more than 25 million hectares have been purchased or leased in land deals estimated to have cost $30 billion.

The need to provide food security to growing populations has triggered a global race for arable land.

In this context, China has been one of the most aggressive investors in the search for food security. Currently feeding one-fifth of the global population with just one-fifteenth of the world's arable land, China has been acquiring land assets in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America since 1995.

Wealthy oil states have more recently joined the rush.

Cash rich, resource poor countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates which buy food on volatile world food markets, are looking to protect themselves against sky-rocketing prices which have triggered more than 60 riots since 2007.

Saudi Arabia is expected to be completely dependent on foreign wheat supplies within five years and is urgently pursuing land deals from Ethiopia to Indonesia. Much of the land sought by investor countries has been in areas with good water supplies and ready access to port facilities.

Is this a new form of neo-colonialism?

Although more than 100 such deals are estimated to have been completed, the race for food poses enormous ethical questions yet to be resolved. Some of the most hotly sought after countries include world food program recipients like the Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and northern Pakistan.

Should countries experiencing famine be exporting food crops to foreign government investors?

The trend in large scale land deals undoubtedly has the potential to produce GDP growth, inject capital into neglected agricultural industries and provide critical infrastructure in poor countries.

Governments looking to acquire foreign agriculture assets must also provide for present and future population demands, and assess forecasts against uncertainty on world food markets.

At least 20 countries including Brazil and India now recognise the right to food in their constitutions. Since 2001, the Supreme Court of India has frequently enforced this right by ordering the emergency distribution of government food stockpiles.

Do home front legal obligations provide impetus for large scale land acquisitions? A tricky balancing act, land deals which deny target countries food security or create a dependency on foreign food aid also violate the internationally recognised human right to food.

Under Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, states have a threefold obligation to respect, protect and fulfil this right. The question becomes, at what cost?

Jeffrey Sachs, advisor to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, argues that foreign policy land deals can be 'win-win' when negotiated with respect to the rights of local populations.

The right to self determination, the exploitation of natural resources and accountability for the use of revenue following such deals, are all critical elements of international law which provide a framework in which mutually beneficial transactions can take place.

The issue of whether profit maximisation leads countries in a 'race to the bottom' whilst competing for foreign land investment is yet to be determined.

Yet compliance with United Nations principles designed to regulate large scale land acquisition currently operates on a voluntary basis. Whilst local populations in Tanzania and Ethiopia have received compensation for large scale land deals, what of 400,000 hectares acquired by United States investors in southern Sudan from the family of alleged war lord, Gariel Matip?

Concern over the loss of land to foreigners was acutely evident in the recent failure of one of the biggest foreign agriculture ventures in history.

The fallout following Daewoo's attempts to acquire a 99 year lease over half of all arable land in Madagascar for crop exports to South Korea resulted in violent protests, more than 125 deaths and the fall of the Ravalomanana government.

Chillingly, the Pakistani government is now offering farmland to foreign investors with 100,000 men to act as security for foreign assets.

By 2030, there may be more than 1.5 billion extra mouths to feed in the world, the largest absolute increases being in China, India and Indonesia. Currently, more than one billion people in the world suffer from malnutrition, including more than 640 million in the Asia Pacific.

Over the next few decades, food security will become of paramount importance. Although population growth is undoubtedly a driving factor in large scale land acquisition, this developing trend forces hard questions about the need to plan for future generations, the nature of the world agricultural market, and why foreign governments may be seeking food security elsewhere. And food, as a resource, is unlike any other.

Latest Episode

Hot Topic

The Prime Minister has announced Australia will be expanding its military role in Iraq for up to two years. Tony Abbott has signed off on sending 300 Australian soldiers for a joint mission with New Zealand.

It's a fundamental human yearning to be a part of something bigger than one's self, and maybe that's what drove my mate Ash to die, far from home, in a bloody foreign war against Islamic State, writes C August Elliott.